Sick to death of the feminist movement PRESUMING to speak 'for women'....
( what happened to the ability to post journals by the way? I was in the middle of a move across the country and been absent. I am registering discontent with that change.)
I was listening today to two women discussing the Obamacare mandate that would force churches to provide reproductive planning in the medical benefits they provide or be subject to penalties by the federal government. The feminist woman wanted to continue to try to make this about a woman's right to choose, ignoring what the real issue happens to be. So, I want to make a few points on the issue:
1) There is no 'right' to any particular type of medical care. There is NOTHING in the Constitution about medical benefits whatsoever, so I find it especially infuriating to have this assertion continually made by those who WISH that were the case, just as they WISH it were the case that abortion is a RIGHT. There is a HUGE difference between something being LEGAL and something being a RIGHT, protected--not PROVIDED--by the state. It is LEGAL for me to purchase and consume alcohol in every state in this country, but I do not have a RIGHT to either purchase it where and when I wish, NOR is the state OBLIGATED because it is LEGAL to PROVIDE unconditional ACCESS to alcohol. The fact is that there are dry counties all across this country, even while it is LEGAL to sell alcohol.
2) There is a MISCONCEPTION--pun intended--that not PROVIDING specific benefits, somehow DENIES women access. How so? And don't those women have the CHOICE to work somewhere where the benefits packages provided by the employer are to her liking? I mean..she does NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to dictate to her employer what they WILL or WILL NOT provide in the form of benefits; she INSTEAD has the FREEDOM to work ELSEWHERE...THAT is exercising CHOICE in a manner that is conducive to the FREEDOMS of BOTH parties. Women who currently work for churches presumably have NO ISSUE with those benefits not being provided, at least not to the degree that it has kept them from taking employment there. Churches however DO have the RIGHT, protected Constitutionally, to have NO GOV'T mandating they take part in PROVIDING what goes directly against their MORAL or DOCTRINAL preaching under threat of penalty by the government. It is a DIRECT VIOLATION of that right. You see one IS a 'right'...the other is not. There is no RIGHT to healthcare; there is no RIGHT to a particular TYPE of healthcare; there is no RIGHT to any particular employment...but there IS a RIGHT to Congress making NO LAW AFFECTING the ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION or the FREE PRACTICE THEREOF. PERIOD. For a Constitutional 'scholar'--term used LOOSELY--this president must know what he's seeking to violate...and he's actually tearing DOWN one of the Democratic rally cries: Separation of CHURCH and STATE....Just as the state cannot be a vehicle used to promote religion, the state CANNOT impose its moral code BEYOND protected Constitutional rights onto the church. The feminists who are right now standing behind the president on this may find, if he succeeds to tear down the separation of church and state, that it will backfire when a new president and this new 'precedent' is in office...one who wishes to use the state power to dictate on religion to thrust their belief via state institutions onto them, but they will have not only allowed it to happen, but championed it and will have no leg to stand on to fight it...they will be exposed as hypocrites.
3) The church or any other 'business' that does not currently provide these particular benefits are not "DENYING" women access...not PROVIDING it is not synonomous with DENYING them access. There are any number of choices available to women whose work provided medical plan does not provide reproductive coverage: a) presumably they are EMPLOYED so why can't they PAY for their CHOICE to have it?, b) there are any number of FEDERALLY FUNDED programs available to women providing these services for FREE and several other supplemental plans available to provide for prescriptions uniquely.
4) I am so TIRED of these women suggesting they speak FOR ME. They do NOT! And because I disagree with them politically does not mean that I 'hate my own gender." The WHOLE POINT of the women's movement--as it was SOLD to the American population--was to open up CHOICE and VOICE for women...and they are NOT MONOLITHIC, but individuals. I'm so TIRED of them screaming about the 'poor women' as if they are 'victims.' We're not victims; we're not monolithic; we HAVE CHOICE and the VOTE...the women's movement has renedered itself just an aggitant wing of the liberal democrat party...ironically, it was the Republican party that embraced women's rights FIRST; it was the party CHOSEN by the first women to take advantage of the vote and a role in government office. But they allowed themselves to be over-run by people who are ANTI-diversity in THOUGHT or political ideology and have bastardized the term CHOICE to mean 'compliance with our militant feminist view' and rendered all other women the ENEMY. It's so sad. And I am SICK TO FREAKING DEATH of it!
thoughts?
P
you can still post journals.
He isn't mandating churches provide anything. Affiliated hospitals and schools that list themselves as EEOE and benefit from Federal funding is another issue all together.
The same thing is happening in the thread about why pro life advocates should support handing out birth control. A couple of women presented well reasoned and thought out reasons for not supporting either but severL mommas still continue to insist the only reason one would be against abortion being a choice is that they deep down just hate womenkind and want us back in the dark ages.
Churches are and already were exempt. I think you mean religiously affiliated businesses like hospitals, etc. Even on that one the Obama administration has changed that policy to appease religious people.
Why are you against birth control being covered by insurance just like VIAGRA is covered?
The hospitals, orphanages, sports facilities, youth facilities are EXTENSIONS of that religious belief and doctrine. Indeed, they were the choices BECAUSE of those beliefs; they cannot be separated.
In addition, they will not BE appeased, as they should not. Because he made an 'overture' does not mean anything, in addition, he does NOT WRITE FREAKING LAW or REGS...??? Hello???
Where did you get the idea that "I" am 'against' birth control being covered by insurance? Where did I say that? This isn't about WHETHER or not it is 'covered;' it's about whether or not it should be MANDATED to be covered. Ah...HUGE difference. In addition, it's about whether or not ANY business ought to be COMPELLED to offer ANY particular 'benefits' package, but in any case, if they DO provide it--they are also PAYING, not JUST their employees. In general, the business picks up the larger percentage of costs, since it's providing a percentage for EVERY employee.--it ought to be UP TO THEM WHAT they provide. The employee is FREE TO CHOOSE not to WORK where they don't LIKE the medical benefit; they have not RIGHT to that particular JOB...In addition, they have OTHER options, obviously, they are EMPLOYED! So why can't THEY pay for what THEY determine to be a PRIORITY? Why can't THEY DECIDE what they DEEM a priority with regards to the TYPE of medical coverage? Who the HELL Is the federal gov't to DECIDE FOR THEM what they WILL or OUGHT to have? Where is the CHOICE involved in THAT????
I just don't get how the party of 'CHOICE" seems so HYPOCRITICAL on these KEY issues with regards to both the reproductive mandate, but to a larger degree the healthcare mandate altogether. On the one hand they SCREAM about 'RIGHT TO CHOOSE" while they support the gov't STRIPPING that RIGHT from every American who feels that medical insurance benefits are a PRIVATE matter and CHOICE to make, both as individuals and as free enterprises.
And the separation of church and state is a MUCH MORE IMPORTANT issue than medical. It just is...without FREEDOM, who the hell cares how healthy you are for tyranny?
P
Quoting futureshock:
Churches are and already were exempt. I think you mean religiously affiliated businesses like hospitals, etc. Even on that one the Obama administration has changed that policy to appease religious people.
Why are you against birth control being covered by insurance just like VIAGRA is covered?
In today's environment, I would say they are synonomous with MILITANT, POLITICAL wing of the Democratic party.
How you doin?
P
Quoting LauraKW:
Define "feminist".
You can? When I went to my profile page, it shows my previously posted journals, but there is no longer a 'button' at the bottom to 'write a post' There is only one and it says 'view'.
Sorry, I disagree. I don't think it is a 'separate' issue, whether or not they benefit from federal funding has nothing to do with it at all. Nowhere in the first amendment does it state, 'except those affiliations that receive federal funding.' Nowhere. In addition, they ARE citizens and have as much right to 'benefit' from federal/public monies as any other venture that provides a service to the community...unless you want to suggest that they do not provide ervices beneficial to the whole community.
How've you been?
P
Quoting katy_kay08:
you can still post journals.
He isn't mandating churches provide anything. Affiliated hospitals and schools that list themselves as EEOE and benefit from Federal funding is another issue all together.
Videos
Sometimes Single Parenting
The Kristen Chase Show
When your spouse is gone for days or even weeks at a time for work, how do you manage everything you need to do for your kids, your house and yourself? How do you prepare for your spouse's return so that the transition is as easy as possible for the whole family? Kristen is joined by Tracie Montgomery, working mother of two, to discuss some ideas to survive sometimes single parenting.
Watch More Videos from CafeMom Studios ››
Eight Year Old Girl Given "Catastrophe Award" By Teacher
Should P. Diddy's son return $54,000 college scholarship?
- norwegianwood
on Feb. 13, 2012 at 6:57 PM